ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags flight 77 , flight data recorder , google earth

Reply
Old 17th April 2007, 05:44 AM   #1
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
9/11 on Google Earth

Here's the AA77 flight path rendering, using PfT's CSV file from aa77fdr.com and MikeW's CSV from 911myths.com. This will probably not be fully operational on anything older than GoogleEarth4. If it is going to work at all.

You mustn't unzip the file, just rename it by removing .zip extension.

PfT's flight path is accompanied with to scale B757 models, courtesy of Dan O., showing pitch, roll and true heading. Models are drawn every 15s for most of the flight, last 7 minutes (autopilot off, the loop manouver) are drawn every second. Models are not switched on as the kmz file loads. One has to manually check the folder "aa77fdr Flight Data" in the list view on the left to make them visible. Since these are models, not icons, one cannot click them to get additional info. There is a workaround, but it'll have to wait for the next implementation. For now, you have to open the folder and click each item as desired. Names show the time at which a particular location was reached.

Latitude, longitude, pitch, roll, true heading, mag heading, CAS, ground speed, track angle and accelerations were taken from the CSV as is, without modifications from my part. Altitude was crudely adjusted for weather, by adding 275ft to CSV pressure altitude data. Of course, under an asumption that PfT CSV's altitude is also pressure altitude as it is in MikeW's. Altitude was then converted to meters and presented in GE as absolute.

For the Comic Book Guys among you - additional 3m altitude were shaved off of flight path for aesthetic resons, so the flightpath stays below the plane models. The center of models is at actual CSV adjusted altitude, path is 3m lower. Popup balloons in GE show actual adjusted altitude. Plane models were gracefully donated by Dan O.

MikeW's CSV flight path is a basic rendering of Lat/Long data after some longitude correction. Since its geolocation resolution is much coarser (1 latitude minute as opposed to about 1 lat second resolution in the aa77fdr CSV), it didn't make sense to include plane models. Likewise, the altitude is taken directly from CSV, without any adjustments and is presented as relative to ground.

I have no idea as to the actual accuracy of lat/long data in either CSV file. Nor GEearth's, though I have a hunch it's more accurate than either FDR data appears to be. Obviously, the plane couldn't've had taken off half a mile south from the runway, as in aa77fdr.com data, let alone 20 miles west from it, as in 911myths data. However, I do believe that after the longitude correction is performed on 911myths version, they are both accurate to within a nautical mile.

But then again, I have no aerospace credentials what so ever. I'm just fascinated with GoogleEarth and I've been living on the outskirts of GIS realm for quite a few years, mainly through web based programing surrounding MapServer software. But no, I don't have any geographical credentials either.

Once again, thanks, Dan O.! Thanks, MikeW! Thanks also to Undertow, I guess (if my memory serves me right, he's the one who got the .fdr file and solicited help for data extraction).

Is there any demand for Pentagon eyewitnesses in GE?
Attached Files
File Type: zip aa77v2.5.3.kmz.zip (130.1 KB, 133 views)
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 05:47 AM   #2
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
9-11 was not an inside job. please get over it.
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 05:55 AM   #3
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,154
Incredible work. Thank you all that were involved!
Arkan_Wolfshade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 05:58 AM   #4
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
9-11 was not an inside job. please get over it.
Well, that is not what I'm saying, Parky

Thanks, Mr. Wolfshade.
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 06:15 AM   #5
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
9-11 was not an inside job. please get over it.
Er... dude... I think you need to take a break.

This is a very valuable debunking resource...

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 06:43 AM   #6
chipmunk stew
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,448
Wow!
chipmunk stew is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 10:15 AM   #7
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,770
The best nav data on 77 would be up to 3000 feet off! There is data missing from the FDR. The FDR confirms 77 hitting the Pentagon. Darn, all those liars about DNA, witnesses and planted posts goes up like dustified memories from Judy and Uncle Fetzer.

Are there any truthers with any facts? no

OMG the data shows 77 was right on target to hit at the base of the Pentagon. Too bad PFT can not figure out simple flight path reconstruction and how to match the FDR with where the damaged data begins, therefore missing.

I ran myself down to 57 feet elevation in front of the Pentagon on GoogleEarth, and there is the distance is a jet coming for me, I have seen this before watching landings at the end of the runway. 77 is not very stable but it is an easy job hitting the biggest office building in the world.

Truthers have no ideas about how the FDR works or even what it stores. BTW there are two sets of NAV LAT and LONG stored in the FDR. The truthers show utter lack of knowledge about what they present.

To find the real position of flight 77 you have to use the heading data. The heading data is the most accurate data in the FDR. Pilots must have accurate heading. In the last seconds before impact flight 77 was on a magnetic heading of 70 degrees, and that did not vary more than a degree. When you actually take the data and run the heading back from the impact point witnessed on 9/11 you have the perfect fit with the FDR, witnesses, RADAR DATA tapes, physical evidence, impact damage, impact energy, etc. The impact energy matches the FDR speed for 77. The witnesses when analyzed all match the FDR motion; if the truthers tried they could tell everyone this. Dart even the Radar Data tapes match the FDR flight path. Now as you can see from the data the Lat and Long can not be used to slew the map with the actual aircraft position! The NAV data is only accurate to 3000 feet. Draw a 3000 foot circle around each dot you have and you have the probable position of flight 77 according to the FDR lat and long. Sorry the PFT have no clue or brains when it comes to the truth; PFT is also an ironic name for tall tale liars. Leaving out all the details about each data point from the FDR means you have no viable conclusion for an inside job and essential the PFT are trying to sell DVDs about 9/11 and make money.

Last edited by beachnut; 17th April 2007 at 10:54 AM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 03:00 PM   #8
apathoid
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,918


Great job putting all of this together Celestrin.

Quote:
Of course, under an asumption that PfT CSV's altitude is also pressure altitude as it is in MikeW's. Altitude was then converted to meters and presented in GE as absolute.
You can try using PfTs radar altitude instead of PA. It doesnt need any form of correction and it measures altitude above ground level. We've had a discussion about the accuracy of the pneumatic data and how it very likley lags at very high vertical speeds and the fact that the B757 Air Data Computer as well as the Static system isn't calibrated for low-level high speed flight. The lagging is actually evident in PfTs data because corrected PA(corrected for barometric setting and referenced to sea level) is quite a bit higher than the radalt altitude.

Quote:
I have no idea as to the actual accuracy of lat/long data in either CSV file. Nor GEearth's, though I have a hunch it's more accurate than either FDR data appears to be. Obviously, the plane couldn't've had taken off half a mile south from the runway, as in aa77fdr.com data, let alone 20 miles west from it, as in 911myths data. However, I do believe that after the longitude correction is performed on 911myths version, they are both accurate to within a nautical mile.
I've made a few posts on this subject as well. The initial entry position for the Flight Management System {FMS} can be up to a mile off in both latitude and longitude, and on airplanes not fitted with GPS(almost all 757s built prior to '99) the initial position is entered via keypad. So its really not a surprise that the position @ IAD was 3000 ft off.

Surely johndoex, or some tr00fer, will claim that if one moves the path to match the departure runway and applies the same correction(ie 900m 015 degrees) to the end of the flight path, you have a plane north of the Citgo somewhere in the vicinity of Lagasses and Brooks alleged flightpath. But, this can't be the case because the FMS automatically tunes navaids and does a little trig and then applies a correction to the lat/long data. It does this fairly often. And this correction is usually "applied" in a smooth manner so that if the airplane is enagaged in LNAV(Lateral Navigation), in which the autopilot flies a path over predetermined waypoints, the airplane won't make an excessive, large correction since the waypoint has essentially moved as much as a mile. Thats also why you don't see a sudden shift in the flight path shortly after departure..

Quote:
Is there any demand for Pentagon eyewitnesses in GE?
Thanks for that as well!
apathoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 03:37 PM   #9
slyjoe
Master Poster
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 2,351
Great job!
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 03:41 PM   #10
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
This is going to get somebody a brand-new corner office in NWO headquarters!
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 05:08 PM   #11
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
My bad. I thought this was more "evidence" of a CT. Keep up the good work!!
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 06:34 PM   #12
porch
Muse
 
porch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 578
Can someone help me understand this? Right now, I barely know what field(s) I'm a layman in regarding this . . ..stuff. I'm also having a hard time renaming that file. When I right-click and hit rename, it doesn't show the .zip part!

If someone doesn't hold my hand and guide me through this, I'll be forced to assume that it's further NWO obfuscation through The Dark Arts. AND THE SATANISTS SHOVE IT RIGHT IN OUR FACES!!!
porch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 06:45 PM   #13
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
Originally Posted by porch View Post
Can someone help me understand this? Right now, I barely know what field(s) I'm a layman in regarding this . . ..stuff. I'm also having a hard time renaming that file. When I right-click and hit rename, it doesn't show the .zip part!

If someone doesn't hold my hand and guide me through this, I'll be forced to assume that it's further NWO obfuscation through The Dark Arts. AND THE SATANISTS SHOVE IT RIGHT IN OUR FACES!!!

open windows explorer
click on tools
click on folder options
click on the view tab
Un check the box "hide extensions for known file types"
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 08:10 PM   #14
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Excellent work, it is very interesting seeing it all laid out like that. This presentation of the flight path totally destroy's Lyte Trip's assertion that eyewitnesses could not have seen AA77 perform it's large turning procedure to burn off altitude. It would have been plainly visible from virtually anywhere.

Couple of things I noticed...

During some of the ascent and descent sections the aircraft nose doesn't appear to reflect the direction, and during the large turn the model of the aircraft is depicted in a port wing down bank, whereas it should be a starboard wing down bank. Could it be the pitch/roll positions are all backwards?

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 08:15 PM   #15
JamesB
Master Poster
 
JamesB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,152
Those are some pretty high quality photos of the Pentagon. Could someone please point out the anti-aircraft missile batteries for me?
__________________
I said lots of things in NPH that I would not say today and that I did not repeat in NPHR, where I specifically corrected at least some of the errors I had made in that earlier book, written 5 years ago.
-David Ray Griffin-
JamesB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 08:55 PM   #16
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,072
Crikey, I wish I could run it. Sounds like great work! Thanks, guys.
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard

What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 09:37 PM   #17
CurtC
Illuminator
 
CurtC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,785
So is that where the FDR data ends, about 1/2 mile SW of the Sheraton?

Also, I see Google Earth has a feature to "play" the file, but it does so from a fairly low altitude, and it doesn't have any way to start in the middle, that I can find, so you have to start out at Dulles. Am I missing something?
__________________
Is there a God? Find the answer at The Official God FAQ.
CurtC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 09:48 PM   #18
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 38,317
OK, I've saved it without the .zip extension. How do I view it?
__________________
"We stigmatize and send to the margins
people who trigger in us the feelings we want to avoid"
- Melinda Gates, "The Moment of Lift".
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 09:54 PM   #19
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by orphia nay View Post
OK, I've saved it without the .zip extension. How do I view it?
you need google earth installed, with that its just a matter of double clicking the file
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 10:33 PM   #20
apathoid
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,918
Originally Posted by CurtC View Post
So is that where the FDR data ends, about 1/2 mile SW of the Sheraton?
It would appear so.

Quote:
Also, I see Google Earth has a feature to "play" the file, but it does so from a fairly low altitude, and it doesn't have any way to start in the middle, that I can find, so you have to start out at Dulles. Am I missing something?
AFAIK, the only thing you can do is uncheck the 'check-all' box labelled "aa77fdr Flight Data", and manually check the ones you want to see. Additionally you can speed up the fy-to and tour settings. Thats in the tools>options>touring menu. If you wanted to, you could also customize the individual "time plots" by right-clicking on the time and selecting properties and there should be an altitude option in there. I'm not sure but I don't think you can change all of them to a common value.

edit: On second thought, changing the altitude actually moves the object to that altitude. I'm pretty sure there is a setting for the viewing altitude, but I forgot where it is.

edit2: Fingered it out, you can change the viewing altitude by right-clicking the "time plot" > View > hit "reset" button and manually enter the altitude in the "range" field. I tried actually changing the "AA77 FDR CSV's (v2.5)" viewing range instead of doing the individual times, but it doesnt seem to have any effect.

Last edited by apathoid; 17th April 2007 at 10:55 PM.
apathoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 11:28 PM   #21
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Thanks for all the feedback.

Gumboot, what do you mean by wrong direction? Is the plane pointing backwards, or is it just slightly turned off of the direction of flight? If it's just slightly turned, that might be the drift (and/or yaw). There are some points in flight, particularly just after take off, when the plane drifts by almost 10°. It appears there was quite a wind upthere. If you popup a balloon for the particular position, there are three headings.

Track angle is actual flight direction. At least I think it should be. And it should comply with the flight path below. True heading is the direction, the plane's nose is, or should be, pointing at. Those are not neccessary the same, because of wind and/or rudder action by the pilot. The third heading is magnetic, but that's not used anywhere and it doesn't affect the position of plane models.

Pitch/Roll seem OK to me, but I do have to say I haven't been able to check each and every model up close. Is the roll wrong during the whole turn? Post some screenshots. Here's a few of my own.



Can you be more specific which models appear weird?

Apathoid, yes there is also radar alt, but I wanted to present the complete flight paths first. Rad alt works only to about 2500 ft, but I'm sure I don't have to tell you this. I've been following your and Anti-Sophist's posts and learned a lot. You guys put it more eloquently and precisely than I ever could and the terminology used is still a bit above my attention span That's why I can't explain why I think the Lat/Long data is only accurate to 1NM in precise language. Beachnut, has also posted some useful info. Well, at least when I was able to vaguely understand what he was talking about

Sorry, Beachnut, I'm unable to parse your post above. Is it supposed to be a rant/critique of PfT in general or is it a critique of my presentation?

Gravy, you don't have Google Earth or does it fail to load? Or did the HQ get you stuck with a decade old, hand me down computer from our globalist depository? Well, that's for being a field operative. Should've had joined the Office Corps when you had a chance. Sure, counting socks is a bit tedious at times, but we get computers which are hardly 3 years old!

About "playing" the file. Animation, by flying behind the plane, is on my mind, I just have to come up with right trigonometry to adjust the view of each particular point. I'm not there yet. If you just want to play a particular section of the flight path, you'll have to copy or move those points, one by one, into some other folder and play them there.
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2007, 11:59 PM   #22
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by celestrin View Post
Thanks for all the feedback.

Gumboot, what do you mean by wrong direction? Is the plane pointing backwards, or is it just slightly turned off of the direction of flight? If it's just slightly turned, that might be the drift (and/or yaw). There are some points in flight, particularly just after take off, when the plane drifts by almost 10°. It appears there was quite a wind upthere. If you popup a balloon for the particular position, there are three headings.


It's obviously something wrong with my display, because the aircraft has an incorrect roll position for the entire turn...

Here's a screen cap:



This second picture shows what I mean about the pitch angle...

This is the final descent towards The Pentagon...

According to the FDR the aircraft was pushed into full throttle, so there's now way it would have continued to descend in a nose-up attitude like this.



But it appears the bug is that for some reason my Google Earth is displaying it backwards.

-Gumboot

ETA...

Heh, okay well I think this settles it... for some reason it's displaying it backwards for me...

That is, unless the below picture is a standard American Airlines departure profile...



Heh.
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

Last edited by gumboot; 18th April 2007 at 12:04 AM.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 12:06 AM   #23
apathoid
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,918
Originally Posted by celestrin View Post

Apathoid, yes there is also radar alt, but I wanted to present the complete flight paths first. Rad alt works only to about 2500 ft, but I'm sure I don't have to tell you this.

Yup, I was just suggesting that perhaps it could be used for the final portion of the flight, for the sake of accuracy - especially with PfT espousing their theory that the plane was "too high!!" and I just thought that radalt data might've been easier to deal with.

Quote:
That's why I can't explain why I think the Lat/Long data is only accurate to 1NM in precise language.

Technically, it should be accurate to 0.1 NM, which is the resolution of the DME data that the FMS uses to update the lat/long. But as I mentioned above, there is an inherent error introduced when the position is input and the FMS will indeed accept positions that are a mile off both in lat and long. Only until a valid VOR/DME is tuned, will the FMS start updating and correcting the lat/long. It may sound kind of silly that the FMS needs to correct the errors that it previously allows, but the reason the lat/long updates isn't because it has to correct the entry error; it's to correct inertial drift, which can be as much as 3 NM/hour
apathoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 12:12 AM   #24
apathoid
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,918
Originally Posted by gumboot View Post
It's obviously something wrong with my display, because the aircraft has an incorrect roll position for the entire turn...

Here's a screen cap:

{snip}
I just noticed it's backwards for me as well.
apathoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 12:14 AM   #25
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Well ,those do look weird, Gumboot. Can you put time tags to them? Especially the departing one. And what GEarth version are you using?

Yeah, thanks, Apathoid. About short range DME accuracy. I know, well, I've read it somewhere, that DME accuracy is generally up to 0.1NM, but I can imagine that the accuracy would drop as you get closer to the repeater. Is there any idea how accurate DME is 1.5NM from the repeater?
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 12:17 AM   #26
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by celestrin View Post
Well ,those do look weird, Gumboot. Can you put time tags to them? Especially the departing one. And what GEarth version are you using?

I'm a bit of a Google Earth virgin so you will have to talk me through this "time tag" thing...

I only downloaded Google Earth an hour or two ago, so I'm assuming it's the newest version.

-Gumboot

ETA. the time for that departure one is 08:20:30. It's the first aircraft model once the flight is airbourne (the previous one the aircraft is still on the runway)
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

Last edited by gumboot; 18th April 2007 at 12:20 AM.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 12:33 AM   #27
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Thanks. I get this.


Could you just copy the following code to clipboard and paste it in GE's list view? You get a placemark. Doubleclick it to adjust the view and save a screencap, please.
Code:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<kml xmlns="http://earth.google.com/kml/2.1">
<Document>
	<name>KmlFile</name>
	<StyleMap id="m_ylw-pushpin_copy0">
		<Pair>
			<key>normal</key>
			<styleUrl>#s_ylw-pushpin_copy0</styleUrl>
		</Pair>
		<Pair>
			<key>highlight</key>
			<styleUrl>#s_ylw-pushpin_hl_copy0</styleUrl>
		</Pair>
	</StyleMap>
	<Style id="s_ylw-pushpin_copy0">
		<IconStyle>
			<scale>1.1</scale>
			<Icon>
				<href>http://maps.google.com/mapfiles/kml/pushpin/ylw-pushpin.png</href>
			</Icon>
			<hotSpot x="20" y="2" xunits="pixels" yunits="pixels"/>
		</IconStyle>
	</Style>
	<Style id="s_ylw-pushpin_hl_copy0">
		<IconStyle>
			<scale>1.3</scale>
			<Icon>
				<href>http://maps.google.com/mapfiles/kml/pushpin/ylw-pushpin.png</href>
			</Icon>
			<hotSpot x="20" y="2" xunits="pixels" yunits="pixels"/>
		</IconStyle>
	</Style>
	<Placemark>
		<name>screenshot</name>
		<LookAt>
			<longitude>-77.13406285962059</longitude>
			<latitude>38.76918047776447</latitude>
			<altitude>0</altitude>
			<range>4398.415556215872</range>
			<tilt>67.00602126382916</tilt>
			<heading>-95.77250840991209</heading>
		</LookAt>
		<styleUrl>#m_ylw-pushpin_copy0</styleUrl>
		<Point>
			<coordinates>-77.14527332482233,38.76748511673036,0</coordinates>
		</Point>
	</Placemark>
</Document>
</kml>
Here's what I get.

ETA: You can save jpegs in GE by going to File->Save->Save Image

Last edited by celestrin; 18th April 2007 at 12:36 AM.
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 12:45 AM   #28
apathoid
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,918
Originally Posted by celestrin View Post

Yeah, thanks, Apathoid. About short range DME accuracy. I know, well, I've read it somewhere, that DME accuracy is generally up to 0.1NM, but I can imagine that the accuracy would drop as you get closer to the repeater. Is there any idea how accurate DME is 1.5NM from the repeater?
I think you may be referring to slant range. Since DME measures line-of-sight range to the DME station, if you overfly the station at altitude - the distance will indeed be off from the very same position on the ground(ie if you directly overfly the station at 35,000 ft, the DME range won't drop below about 6 NM).

In the case of flight 77, the aircraft was so low at that point that the slant range and actual range were only like 10 feet different!

"Inside the box", there is nothing that would make the system less accurate closer to the station. The DME interrogates the ground station something 100x a second and the reply is only delayed by a few microseconds, which is actually compensated for in the DME.
apathoid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 12:56 AM   #29
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Interestingly enough, if you look at the FDR flight track (assuming it is accurate) the final position is 1,411 metres from the Citgo station, and the projected heading will carry the aircraft to the south.

Travelling at 460kt (ignoring the fact it's accelerating for now) the aircraft will reach the Citgo in 5.1 seconds. At the final position it also has a 3.5o roll to starboard which has increased from a port roll in the previous 3 seconds, which means it's only the beginning of the input.

So in 5.1 seconds the aircraft has to reverse it's current roll, and roll back the other way enough to shift it's lateral position by about 200-250 metres.

Is that enough data to calculate the G-force such a maneouver would produce?

The aircraft then has 520m (2.1 seconds) to correct back the other way even FURTHER to ensure the aircraft passes The Pentagon at the point where the explosion occurs.

-Gumboot

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:00 AM   #30
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
celestrin,

I get the following:



-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:02 AM   #31
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Sorry to spam the thread with my repeated posts...

I wonder if a similar model could be presented for UA93? It would be interesting to see.

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:02 AM   #32
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by apathoid View Post
I think you may be referring to slant range. Since DME measures line-of-sight range to the DME station, if you overfly the station at altitude - the distance will indeed be off from the very same position on the ground(ie if you directly overfly the station at 35,000 ft, the DME range won't drop below about 6 NM).

In the case of flight 77, the aircraft was so low at that point that the slant range and actual range were only like 10 feet different!

"Inside the box", there is nothing that would make the system less accurate closer to the station. The DME interrogates the ground station something 100x a second and the reply is only delayed by a few microseconds, which is actually compensated for in the DME.
Ok. Makes sense, thanks. I'll stick to .1 then.
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:05 AM   #33
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by gumboot View Post
celestrin,

I get the following:


-Gumboot
I have no explanation for this. Did you download the GE free or pro version?
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:07 AM   #34
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by gumboot View Post
Sorry to spam the thread with my repeated posts...

I wonder if a similar model could be presented for UA93? It would be interesting to see.

-Gumboot
One would need decoded FDR data.
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:07 AM   #35
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by celestrin View Post
I have no explanation for this. Did you download the GE free or pro version?
Free.

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:37 AM   #36
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
How does this look like with pitch and roll inverted?

(Same procedure, don't unzip, just remove the .zip extension.)
Attached Files
File Type: zip aa77v2.5.3i.kmz.zip (130.8 KB, 8 views)
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:43 AM   #37
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by celestrin View Post
How does this look like with pitch and roll inverted?

(Same procedure, don't unzip, just remove the .zip extension.)


Looks perfect now.

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 01:52 AM   #38
celestrin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by gumboot View Post
Looks perfect now.

-Gumboot
Glad to hear that. Now to figure out what's going on...
celestrin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 04:02 AM   #39
stateofgrace
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,843
I am kind of new to Google earth but managed to get it to run.

Wow, just wow, well done to all concerned.


stateofgrace is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2007, 04:14 AM   #40
TraitorBasher
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 259
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
9-11 was not an inside job. please get over it.
Oh dear. You just jumped on this OP without even reading the post. It proves that you will just attack a truther regardless of what they say.
TraitorBasher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:54 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.